Why the study?
Is it safe to discharge patients with suspected ACS from the emergency department or chest pain unit after ruling out myocardial infarction and high-risk features?
Is it safe to discharge patients with suspected ACS from the emergency department or chest pain unit after ruling out myocardial infarction and high-risk features?
Patients with suspected ACS can be safely discharged from the emergency department or chest pain unit after ruling out MI and high-risk features, as they experience very low short-term cardiovascular mortality.
AIMS: This study is an audit of the risk stratification of patients admitted to a university hospital emergency department with a suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The main aim of the study was to investigate the prognosis of those patients who were discharged to home from the emergency room (ER) or adjacent chest pain observation unit (CPU). METHODS AND RESULTS: Three thousand one hundred and seven consecutive patients admitted to the ER with a suspected ACS were retrospectively identified. Seven hundred and sixty-four (25%) patients were discharged from the ER and 417 (13%) from the CPU after observation and ruling out myocardial infarction (MI) and high-risk ACS. One thousand seven hundred and two patients were hospitalized. Follow-up end-points were cardiovascular mortality, hospitalization for ACS and incidence of any cardiovascular disease event during 6 months. During 4 weeks after the discharge from the ER and CPU cardiovascular mortality was 0.1% and 0.5% and during 6 months 0.8% and 1.7%, respectively. Within 6 months 4.2% and 8.4% of the patients were hospitalized for ACS and 9.3% and 11.5% had a cardiovascular disease event. CONCLUSIONS: Patients admitted with chest pain may be safely discharged from the emergency department, if there is no evidence of MI or high-risk ACS. However, further examination and appropriate treatment must be arranged.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Heli Koukkunen (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: